Macworld 2006 Discussion


Recommended Posts

' date='Jan 10 2006, 12:32' post='587044840']

lol yeah right it would cost like 500 dollars

2gig Nano = $200

4gig = $249 $49 for 2 more gigs

6gig = $300

8gig = $349 ( not really worth it just buy a 30gig iPod instead. )

Assuming the pricing scheme stayed the same. Ya feel'n me now? :rolleyes:

I'd love to see the shuffle killed and the 2gig Nano fall to $149 and the 4gig to $200 etc.

FM tuner and remote

for nano, 5th gen

$49 on sale today

from http://live.worldofapple.com/

Ahh, thanks a ton. I was actually just about to ask that... what would it look like, how can it fit a nano, an ipod, and older ipods. Apparently there are going to be two versions for the nano and the 5th gen? Or one size fits all? I can't imagine one size would look good on both. Anyway, I'll be looking at those when the store comes back online. Might get one for my 5th gen.

Just make it an Intel Mac smile.gif (hopefully)

Oh man, yeah, don't buy a Mac until they go to Intel. It wont be long and it's going to be a huge jump for them.... dare I say... they'll leap ahead?? *giggle*

Ahh, thanks a ton. I was actually just about to ask that... what would it look like, how can it fit a nano, an ipod, and older ipods. Apparently there are going to be two versions for the nano and the 5th gen? Or one size fits all? I can't imagine one size would look good on both. Anyway, I'll be looking at those when the store comes back online. Might get one for my 5th gen.

im pretty sure i read that steve said "works on all current ipods" so what port on the current ipods are pretty much standard with all of them?

im pretty sure i read that steve said "works on all current ipods" so what port on the current ipods are pretty much standard with all of them?

I don't know if it will or not. The stream I'm reading doesn't say, so I was just going by what coolchan said. All iPods have the same connection at the bottom that is used for charging, transfering songs, and various accessories. They took out the remote port from the nanos and 5th gens. That brings me too my question of how do they make ONE that looks good on them all. Or will they have multiple versions. Oh, and they have to have black and white, because I sure as hell don't want a white fm tuner on my black iPod!

Ok, im not a newb, but i LOVE the idea of having a special picture to go with a special date in my calendar, i dont remember ever being able to do this with outlook or other windows software. err at least without going through like 100 steps to do it!

See how fast i turn on my PC? I am sooooooo FICKLE!! :( :(

9:39 am When you receive the email, you click on the RSS link and it launches iPhoto and receives the photo. But apparently, you don't need iPhoto to receive the photos... it's just an RSS feed.

9:38 am Demoing Photocasting. picking pictures, click on Publish to upload to .Mac. Choose to Announce, and brings up mail to email to people.

One thing no-one has picked up on is that the new remote/FM tuner is tunable via the iPod screen...that means the tuner device is sending screen data BACK to the ipod...that's a first for iPod accessories as far as I know, other than the "connected" logo that some cars and docks put up.

9:42 am Can open more than one project at once, realtime effects in titles, export to iPod and create Video Podcasts.

9:41 am Animated themes for movies, real time effects, new audio tools. Moving to iMovie demo.

One thing no-one has picked up on is that the new remote/FM tuner is tunable via the iPod screen...that means the tuner device is sending screen data BACK to the ipod...that's a first for iPod accessories as far as I know, other than the "connected" logo that some cars and docks put up.

the griffin itrip nano you tune the station on the nano's screen. the dock connector has pins for serial communication so its definatly possible as long as the ipod has the sofware. my guess is the FM tuner requires a new version of ipod software

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Python programmers in a nutshell. Now, guess what lang most AI programmers use... :-)
    • There was nothing whatsoever wrong with Vista as an OS after the SP1 update. People who claim it wasn't were using ancient machines for some silly reason. Not kidding, no hyperbole/exaggeration. Vista was good.
    • Windows ME was worse.
    • Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      443
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!